Search Results
Use the filters on the left-hand side of this screen to refine the results further by topic or document type.

United States v. Amoco Chem. Co.

The court holds that neither an amended Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) consent decree between a waste handler and the United States nor a previous trust agreement with other CERCLA defendants bound a waste handler to sign a new trust agreement. The dis...

Advanced Tech. Corp. v. Eliskim, Inc.

The court denies a corporation's motion to reconsider a ruling that disputed issues of material fact exist as to whether the corporation's neighbor can claim an innocent landowner defense, which would allow the neighbor to pursue a Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Ac...

Huish Detergents, Inc. v. Warren County, Ky.

The court holds that a lower court improperly dismissed a laundry detergent manufacturer's claim that an exclusive franchise agreement between a county and a solid waste handler violated the dormant U.S. Commerce Clause. The agreement gave the waste handler the exclusive right to collect and process...

Monarch Tile, Inc. v. Florence, City of

The court holds that a city holding a security interest in property for the purpose of securing repayment of development bonds, which financed acquisition of the property, qualifies for a Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) §101(20)(A) secured creditor exc...

Akiak Native Community v. U.S. Postal Serv.

The court holds that the U.S. Postal Service did not violate either the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) or the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) when it proposed an experimental program that delivers nonpriority mail by surface hovercraft instead of fixed-wing aircraft to eight remote Alas...

Tosco Corp. v. Koch Indus., Inc.

The court grants a panel for rehearing to clarify factual statements from its May 2, 2000, opinion in which it upheld a district court decision finding a previous owner of an oil refinery liable under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act for 15% of all past and f...

Paterson, City of v. Passaic County Bd. of Chosen Freeholders

The court holds that a local utilities authority was not authorized under the New Jersey Municipal and Counties Utilities Authorities Law (MCUAL) to charge prior users of the authority's waste disposal facilities an environmental investment credit (EIC). The authority imposed the EIC in order to liq...

L.C. Dev. Co. v. Lincoln County

The court holds that a county in Missouri can regulate the location of solid waste facilities. A development company challenged a county regulation that prohibits the location of a sanitary landfill within one-quarter mile of any occupied dwelling. A trial court denied the company's motion for summa...

Illinois v. Grigoleit Co.

The court holds on motions for summary judgment that a manufacturer and a newspaper company are liable under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) for allowing a landowner to dispose of their waste on his property without a permit. The court first holds t...

Save Our Wetlands v. Conner

The court holds that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers did not violate the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or act arbitrarily or capriciously in granting a developer a permit to fill wetlands abutting Lake Ponchatrain in Louisiana without first preparing an environmental impact statement (EI...